catsittingstill: (Default)
[personal profile] catsittingstill
CBS has an article here.

I find the Jensen quote particularly telling.  He supposedly wrote this law to give a pregnant woman the right to defend herself against a "boyfriend" punching her in the abdomen to make her miscarry because he doesn't want to pay child support.  Meaning he supposedly thinks she doesn't have the right to defend herself against physical assault now.

The options here are many and none of them good.  1) He believes that women don't have rights.  2) He believes that women who have had sex don't have rights.  3) He never thinks about the actual human being in the "pregnant woman" scenario at all--she never crosses his mind.  4) He is arguing in bad faith for the purpose of convincing decent but not particularly sharp people to support a law permitting the murder of abortion providers.

His defense is that the law would apply only to people committing illegal acts, and abortion is legal, so abortion providers will be safe (ha ha.)

Here is the text of the actual bill.  The relevant part is that the redefinition (of murder to justifiable homicide) would apply: if there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony, or to do some great personal injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished.

That "or" means that the felony part need not apply.

The options here are twofold and neither of them good.  1) He and all twenty-two of the legislators who cosponsored the bill are so completely incompetent at writing basic directions that they are completely unfitted to be allowed to write laws--which will be interpreted from what is written, after all, not what they think they wrote.  2) He and all twenty-two of his cosponsors know perfectly well what they wrote and are arguing in bad faith to convince people who didn't read the actual text of the bill to support a law permitting the murder of abortion providers.

Make no mistake, the Pro-Life terrorists are out there, waiting with their sniper rifles and their bombs.  Since 1993 they have killed eight doctors and tried to kill another seventeen.  They use the "justifiable homicide" defense at their trials (unsuccessfully so far.)  They want you to know they might kill you, and to be afraid.  And many in the larger Pro-Life movement make no bones about publicly supporting Pro-Life terrorism.

If you're feeling kind of tired, having been repeatedly rallied to defend women from having our sexual behavior policed by the State?  That is the intent of the many-pronged conservative assault on women's basic right to be left the heck alone while we get on with our private lives.
 

Date: 2011-02-16 05:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] inamac.livejournal.com
Perhaps some female senator (do they have any?) could propose a bill allowing a woman to castrate any man who looks at her admiringly. Just as an abortion preventative measure, you understand...

(Cynicism as a defence against rage and sorrow.)

Date: 2011-02-16 10:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catsittingstill.livejournal.com
Yeah, I know.

I don't want to turn this into some kind "equal hurt on both sides" contest. Everybody will lose.

I want people to stop trying to hurt women.

Profile

catsittingstill: (Default)
catsittingstill

February 2024

S M T W T F S
    1 23
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 22nd, 2025 01:55 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios